Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[Lootboxer]

So far it looks clearly not bad, but who knows what will happen when noobs will see how OP it is?

[TunaRoll]

Am 13.11.2020 um 13:33, thisismalacoda sagte:

2 vs 3 DDs and 0 vs 2 radar.

 

T9. Early afternoon.

 

This game is an effing joke.

This is a game that has no proper working matchmaker. If it does anything behind the line we cannot see, than it is probably manipulating to some degree. As i said before, SBMM (Skill Based MM) is the future and almost every single successful new multiplayer title has it. The future of online gaming cant be seen and looked at without SBMM. But WG insists on their stupid, outdated "randomness" which kills the fun for a lot of people nowadays. 

 

Also the player base is too "bad" to compensate such random teams, which is why we have all those blowouts/one sided steam rolls.

 

Both "problems" work hand in hand unfortunately.

[TunaRoll]

Vor 1 Stunde, deathsadow sagte:

Well i think the ARP Yamato is designed for weeb-whales, i dont think a newbie would throw this much money into the game... the ship the newbies go for is the Derpitz anyway.

But...but there are newbies that have a lot of money to throw away. I would not say that only long time players (whales) are buying it. Who does not like to have the "biggest battleship" in history right away when money is no problem for you and you just want to shoot around for a bit?

 

Derpitz might be the all time newbie favorite, that is true :D

[TunaRoll]

Vor 19 Stunden, POIfection sagte:

Same here, my fav ships are in T7 but its becomes stupid.

Actually i would even spend money on the Florida (since it feels a bit like Scharnhorst, my fav ship) but the T7 MM (vs T9 all the time) is preventing me to do so, sadly :)

[zekai7498]

12 saat önce, ColonelPete dedi:

The average ARP Yamato outperforms the average Kremlin at the moment...

 

http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20201114/eu_2month/average_ship_u.html

Most of the players are CCs for today,what about tomorrow?I dont expect to sell much but its a start.

Are you expecting the same stats at 500k battles?

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, zekai7498 said:

Most of the players are CCs for today,what about tomorrow?I dont expect to sell much but its a start.

Are you expecting the same stats at 500k battles?

According to witnesses, most ARP Yamato players are not CC.

We have a thread about ARP Yamato numbers and less than 24h after the launch there were more than 500 ARP Yamato players. There will be more.

 

It would be a statistical anomaly to have the same stats after 500k battles. You would have better luck winning the lottery.

[KayaYautja]

On 11/14/2020 at 3:00 PM, TunaRoll said:

This is a game that has no proper working matchmaker. If it does anything behind the line we cannot see, than it is probably manipulating to some degree. As i said before, SBMM (Skill Based MM) is the future and almost every single successful new multiplayer title has it. The future of online gaming cant be seen and looked at without SBMM. But WG insists on their stupid, outdated "randomness" which kills the fun for a lot of people nowadays. 

 

Also the player base is too "bad" to compensate such random teams, which is why we have all those blowouts/one sided steam rolls.

 

Both "problems" work hand in hand unfortunately.

The randomness is complete [edited], had a match earlier at T9 where every single player on my team was sub 47% winrate, me being the only +50%. Three of my teammates where actually sub 40%. Enemy team was 52% and up save one guy who was a 48%. Lumping the skilled players into a single team is so dumb. Complete steam roll.

[ForlornSailor]

6 hours ago, KayaYautja said:

The randomness is complete [edited], had a match earlier at T9 where every single player on my team was sub 47% winrate, me being the only +50%. Three of my teammates where actually sub 40%. Enemy team was 52% and up save one guy who was a 48%. Lumping the skilled players into a single team is so dumb. Complete steam roll.

 

Well, you just described a random system. What you are asking for, is a system, that prevents something from happening. So you actually want a non-random system.

 

And for the nth-time: by distributing bad players "evenly" among teams you dont raise the quality of the game. The only thing you do, by devorcing 40%ers and placing them in opposite teams, is, to push all of them closer to a 50% WR. How does that help the game, and even more important: how do YOU want to identify the sour grapes in the future? After all, you just used Winrate to determine, who was a bad player and found that to be the reason, that you lost. What you gonna do when everyone has 50%? Whom you gonna blame for a loss then? You think you win more then? Your own system will make sure, you stay at 50%. So you actually lose more often. How will you be more happy?

[KayaYautja]

8 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

Well, you just described a random system. What you are asking for, is a system, that prevents something from happening. So you actually want a non-random system.

 

And for the nth-time: by distributing bad players "evenly" among teams you dont raise the quality of the game. The only thing you do, by devorcing 40%ers and placing them in opposite teams, is, to push all of them closer to a 50% WR. How does that help the game, and even more important: how do YOU want to identify the sour grapes in the future? After all, you just used Winrate to determine, who was a bad player and found that to be the reason, that you lost. What you gonna do when everyone has 50%? Whom you gonna blame for a loss then? You think you win more then? Your own system will make sure, you stay at 50%. So you actually lose more often. How will you be more happy?

You know what, you're actually completely right. I didn't think ahead to what that kind of MM would do as regards the lower WR players. Yea, it wouldn't make things better.

[DFens_666]

5 minutes ago, KayaYautja said:

You know what, you're actually completely right. I didn't think ahead to what that kind of MM would do as regards the lower WR players. Yea, it wouldn't make things better.

 

wow, i think you are the first one to accept this after being explained what would happen, hats off to that!

[Excavatus]

27 minutes ago, KayaYautja said:

You know what, you're actually completely right. I didn't think ahead to what that kind of MM would do as regards the lower WR players. Yea, it wouldn't make things better.

What?? how?? no... WHAT? .. WHY?? how???? Why.. WHO???

 

[BlueManCa]

STOP TO THIS UNFAIR MM off 2 tiers difference !

 

Here is a suggestion of FAIR MM :

 

- Same tier : 100% of XP

- Accepting to play with ONE tier above : 130% of XP.

- Accepting to play with a tier under : 90% of XP.

- NEVER 2 tiers of difference like actually.

 

Wargming, what do you wait to set such a MM which bring joy to all mankind ?

 

edited*

[ColonelPete]

1 hour ago, BlueManCa said:

STOP TO THIS UNFAIR MM off 2 tiers difference !

 

Here is a suggestion of FAIR MM :

 

- Same tier : 100% of XP

- Accepting to play with ONE tier above : 130% of XP.

- Accepting to play with a tier under : 90% of XP.

- NEVER 2 tiers of difference like actually.

 

Wargming, what do you wait to set such a MM which bring joy to all mankind ?

 

edited*

You managed to play 16k battles with +2/-2 MM.

If it did not work, you would not have played that much.

 

Breaking the rules on purpose will only result in problems for you.

[Bindolaf_Werebane]

57 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

What?? how?? no... WHAT? .. WHY?? how???? Why.. WHO???

 

We've been beating the same dead horse for 4263 comments now. Win-rate based matchmaking would end up flattening the differences and would be useless. However: Fact is, WG *could* introduce some kind of ELO-based matchmaking, but they don't. For my part I'll stop posting about MM (unless the salt overcomes me, perhaps), I have my strategies for dealing with the matchmaking, I'm ok.

[TunaRoll]

Vor 10 Stunden, ForlornSailor sagte:

 

Well, you just described a random system. What you are asking for, is a system, that prevents something from happening. So you actually want a non-random system.

 

And for the nth-time: by distributing bad players "evenly" among teams you dont raise the quality of the game. The only thing you do, by devorcing 40%ers and placing them in opposite teams, is, to push all of them closer to a 50% WR. How does that help the game, and even more important: how do YOU want to identify the sour grapes in the future? After all, you just used Winrate to determine, who was a bad player and found that to be the reason, that you lost. What you gonna do when everyone has 50%? Whom you gonna blame for a loss then? You think you win more then? Your own system will make sure, you stay at 50%. So you actually lose more often. How will you be more happy?

 

But wouldn't such an MM make every match tight, close and exciting? If every team has a 50% WR in every round, since all good and bad players are divided fairly, then there are significantly (!!!) fewer blowouts and one sided steam rolls. Then I as a player wouldn't care whether I win or lose now, because the rounds themselves would be a lot more fun than being completely overrun and vice versa.

 

In games like Battlefield I don't care if I have wins and loses in constant alternation, because the matches themselves are a lot of fun for me. The outcome of the match is completely irrelevant, because the fun has already started since i have exciting and close matches where everything is possible. So I think your logic makes sense if you play purely stat-focused, but in no way beneficial for the mass of players who just want to have fun in their hobby.

 

Unicum stats don't make you happy if every game was a blowout.

 

Edit: Im not saying that we need a WR based MM. Maybe there are better parameters to use or even an elo-based system like in League of Legends or World of Warcraft. 

[N0rthFear]

I have to ask how the [edited]matchmaking is made? I have played 10 battles today and my team was under 46% WR total every time (oc we lost all games) and the enemy time was around 52- 55% WR. Is this [edited]normal. I am trying to fix my WR to get over 53% and now (after one week only loses) im in 50%.

And im asking again. Why the [edited]you guys trying to [edited]us up? Why i have to play with 150 battles account with ARP Yamato players that dont know how to play the game and ruining mine? WHY?

 

[ColonelPete]

5 minutes ago, hellRais3r_21 said:

Why i have to play with 150 battles account with ARP Yamato players that dont know how to play the game and ruining mine? WHY?

You do not have to. You can play Tier VII or lower.

Apart from that is the average ARP Yamato at the moment stronger than the average Yamato...

 

And there is a reason many players recommend not to use MMM. It can be depressing and make you play worse.

 

[DFens_666]

2 minutes ago, TunaRoll said:

But wouldn't such an MM make every lap tight, close and exciting? If every team has a 50% WR in every round, since all good and bad players are divided fairly, then there are significantly (!!!) fewer blowouts and one sided steam rolls. Then I as a player wouldn't care whether I win or lose now, because the rounds themselves would be a lot more fun than being completely overrun and vice versa. 

 

I wouldnt count on that actually. First of all, you would need to be able to distinguish if a player is good or bad in that specific ship he is playing. Not many people are good in every ship, some have ships in which they can perform good in because they fit their playstyle. Or otherwise inflate their stats with OP ships (hosho f.e.). 2nd, you cant always balance good players. A superunicum CV player has a much easier time influencing the battle than a SU in a Cruiser. He might aswell just outright kill that Cruiser player because he can.

If we look at bad players, the specturm of why they are bad is very big. Some yolo into their deaths 3 mins into the game, others camp in spawn the entire game. They both will have fairly close WR, somewhere in the mid-40ies. But one is gifting the opposite team points, while the other doesnt. And a ship, camping in the back is always favourable for Unicums, as it gives them time to influence the battle. You just need to put enough yoloers into one team to make it impossible for anyone (or any div) to carry them. How can you prevent your teammates from suiciding, zeroing your points? You cant...

 

The only way to prevent steamrolls without rigging the MM might be, to give the side buffs which is currently behind on ships. Alltho id say, this favours good players, as they suddenly have an easier time coming back from a disadvantage. While average players would still not be able to make enough use of those buffs, not to mention bad players.

[N0rthFear]

12 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

You do get there by becoming better. Then your WR will rise.

It can't rise by itself! I have to win battles to do that.

I think that WG is just balancing because they want the noobish players and have fun players to be happy.

I don't play for fun. If i wanted to have fun i would play a single player game no a multiplayer one

 

[ColonelPete]

4 minutes ago, hellRais3r_21 said:

It can't rise by itself! I have to win battles to do that.

I think that WG is just balancing because they want the noobish players and have fun players to be happy.

I don't play for fun. If i wanted to have fun i would play a single player game no a multiplayer one

That is why you have to become better. Then you will win more.

Without getting better, your WR will not rise on its own.

 

There are plenty of players with higher WR, so your speculation about WG balancing WR is pointless.

 

And when you do not play for fun, you should reconsider your choice of game. WoWs is not a game were you can earn money. It is for entertainment.

[ForlornSailor]

33 minutes ago, BlueManCa said:

Anyway. now, for every game with 2 tiers of difference, i quit. 

And i suggest to all players like me who refuse theis UNFAIR MM to do the same : let's  RESIST !

 

Enjoy the ban then. Nothing more to be said I guess.

 

23 minutes ago, hellRais3r_21 said:

Thats the problem. I dont want to quit. I want to join the good players, CCs, Huricane clans ect. and i cant with stats below 55%.

 

First things first. You need to build up the skill to get there. That path could lead you through several clans, while you constantly get better. And thus your winrate will increase and maybe open up a spot at a high clan and so on. Its gonna take time, dont focus on the final goal, but take it step by step.

[N0rthFear]

11 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

And when you do not play for fun, you should reconsider your choice of game. WoWs is not a game were you can earn money. It is for entertainment.

yes but it's a game where i spend money on. If i'm with good teams/players i will have better rewards from clan battles, KoTS etc so i dont have to spend a lot or playing 8 to 12 hours to get the steel and all that to collect ships.

 

[ColonelPete]

5 minutes ago, hellRais3r_21 said:

yes but it's a game where i spend money on. If i'm with good teams/players i will have better rewards from clan battles, KoTS etc so i dont have to spend a lot or playing 8 to 12 hours to get the steel and all that to collect ships.

 

But why would you want these ships, when you do not have fun?

Why would you play a game for over 7k battles, when you do not have fun?

 

That makes no sense.

[BlueManCa]

Why Wargaming is continuing this UNFAIR MM ? This is a non-sense !!!

There is evil persons at the head of the game direction.

[Excavatus]

A few posts had to be removed. 

A little reminder from forum rules, 

 

5. Don’t discuss illegal/forbidden activities

• Promoting rule breaking behavior for the game or forums